PCMag Digital Network
Seen a hot gadget?  Tell Us   
Contact Us  
Sites We Like
Gearlog on Twitter
Gearlog for Kindle
GoodCleanTech Recycling Superguide
Categories:  
mine%21.jpg

So what I really wanted to find out was if the iPhone was worth the money; and somehow I started down the road of comparison testing. (I guess it really is part of my nature).

I lived with the iPhone on a business trip to San Francisco (talk about bringing the coals to Newcastle) and came back with more questions.

More after the jump.

Some background: I've owned and used several smartphones and PDAs from the major players: Palm Vx, HandSpring Visor, Treo 650 (Palm), Toshiba e750 (PocketPC), Sony Ericsson P900 (Symbian UIQ), Nokia N80 (Symbian S60v3), and my current whip, the T-Mobile MDA (Windows Mobile 5). Heck I even used a Newton MessagePad 2100 back in the day. I own the MDA because I want a phone that can also do data functions, like quick lookups on Wikipedia and do multimedia tasks like playing back video files or MP3s. Native programs like SlingPlayer Mobile and Zagat to Go are gravy. The big annoyances with MDA are the lackluster phone performance, and the smaller 2.5mm headphone jack. I tried using a pair of A2DP Bluetooth headphones, but that didn't work as well as my iPod nano 2G with wired earbuds. The MDA is a middling to fair phone, a great PDA, a passable media player, and a passable Internet tablet.

tmob%20MDA.jpg

Now I've also owned several generations of Apple iPod: iPod 2G, iPod 4G (monochrome), and iPod nano 1G and 2G. I used to use a Compaq MMC-based MP3 player before the iPods, and I also own an old Archos av500 for videos on the go.

Now my (current) ultimate pocketable device would give me as many of the following features as possible, and would let me combine the functionality of an iPod and a smartphone:

-A good quality phone, with decent coverage in the NYC area;
-3G or better data;
-WiFi;
-Ability to use iTunes-bought programming and management (Hey, I like being able to check and uncheck content to be synced, even better than the drag-and-drop simplicity of the Archos because sometimes I want to watch things over without having to search for it. Plus iTunes backup is as simple as dragging the iTunes folder over to a shared or USB drive);
-Internet browsing, as close to 'desktop class' as possible;
-Video playback;
-Calendaring with links to Outlook/Entourage;
-Outlook/Entourage Contact management;
-Music playback through high quality third-party earbuds (I like both the Ultimate Ears Triple-Fi 10 Pro and the Shure E4g for quiet room listening or commuting, respectively). This is notable because both pairs of headphones use L-shaped plugs that don't fit in the iPhone;
-Note taking;
-Bluetooth for in-car Handsfree (must have) and dial up networking for laptops (would be nice).;

The MDA plus the iPod nano 2G got me most of the functions above, but I really want a 'one pocket' device, which the iPhone initially promised. Again my scores for the MDA would be: Phone (2.5 out of 5), Internet data tablet (3 out of 5), native apps (5 out of 5), PDA (4.5 out of 5) and media player (3 out of 5). I didn't rate the MDA's email capabilites because our corporate email (still) doesn't support mobile devices aside from a few Blackberries and Goodlink devices.

I borrowed the iPhone for a couple of weeks, with the iPod Touch and an iPod nano 3G as well. coverflow.jpg

The iPhone was both a revelation and a disappointment. The iPhone was an OK to very good phone, since AT&T's service in the NYC area is less than optimal. Things got better when I took it on a trip to San Francisco, which makes sense since the Bay area is Apple's home base. In SF, voice quality was decent, and I didn't drop any calls. Handsfree tethering to two cars (an Acura and a BMW) were the best of any phone I've used, even compared to the Moto RAZR v3. EDGE 2.5G Internet access was OK in NYC, and a little better in SF.

SF has a big plus with the MUNI and BART mobile web sites. It was neat checking on the timing of the next BART train or Muni bus while waiting at a stop. I wish they could do something like that in my home base of NYC. I couldn't tether the iPhone to my notebook like I can with the MDA, but that's OK, since Safari is the best mobile phone browser I've used yet.

Lack of Flash and Java are the notable minuses for mobile Safari. I was still able to access my office's webmail, many information sites, and a couple of iPhone-optimized sites as well. Calendar and contact functions were as good as any non-smartphone, and synced to Entourage/Outlook, so I was happy there.

As a media player, the iPhone was almost perfect. I say almost, because of that darned recessed headphone jack. I kludged a rough 3-inch headphone extension cable from a headphone extender I got in a dongle for a pair of wireless headphones. This was a usable if awkward solution. Like my colleagues Sascha Segan and Tim Gideon, I enjoyed using the touchscreen interface, and movies looked great on the iPhone's bright semi-wide screen. The one other major nit I could pick about the iPhone is that it is awkward to use in your pocket: there is no tactile feedback like on the nanos' clickwheel, so you can't FF to the next song if your shuffle play picks the wrong song for your current mood. This would be moot if the iPod wired FM remote worked with the iPhone or iPod Touch, but sadly that's not the case.

So overall: iPhone as a Phone (3.5 out of 5), Internet Tablet (3.5 out of 5), native apps (1.5 out of 5, there are none aside from a couple of built in widgets), PDA (4 out of 5), and media player (4.5 out of 5). touch%20phone.jpg

The iPod touch is the so-called "iPhone without the phone", and the interface issues are similar to the iPhone. The iPod Touch deletes the iPhone's physical volume controls and speakers, so annoyingly everything on the Touch is done on the touchscreen. It is a brilliant media player, though I wish the speakers were still there for viewing video podcasts and TV shows. Thank goodness the Touch works without a headphone adapter. The iPod Touch also deletes calendar entry, but that's OK, since I use my PDAs to check meetings, not schedule them, Safari is still here, but is limited to WiFi Hotspots. This is the biggest drawback for me, since I like to check things like transit delays on my MDA daily. Having 16GB instead of the 8GB on the iPhone and nano is a nice perk, but not enough for me to shell out $399 for it. If the Touch had a Bluetooth Dial Up Networking profile, I would get that and a 3G Verzion phone with Bluetooth tethering. That would be sweet. (The Nokia N800 internet tablet with a 3G phone is a passable alternative, but unfortunately there aren't enough native apps, and besides, I bought too many iTunes tracks and videos to abandon iPod completely at this point).

iPod Touch rates: Phone (0 out of 5), Internet Tablet (3.0 out of 5), native apps (1 out of 5, just You Tube), PDA (3 out of 5), and media player (4.5 out of 5).

I didn't try out the 80GB and 160GB iPod Classic, because I simply don't need to carry my entire video and music library with me at all times. Also I tend to listen my playlists on shuffle, and hard drive players like the Classics are slower to react than flash players like the nanos and the iPhone/iPod Touch. Besides, the nano 3G and the classic share the same interface.

The iPod nano 3G is an upgrade to my current nano 2G. Apple added video, and changed the shape slightly. They also lowered the price to $199 for 8GB, which is great considering the functionality of the nano 3G. The video quality is excellent, even with such a small screen, though it is better suited to video podcasts and TV shows than full length movies in widescreen. While it has even less calendar and contact functionality than the Touch, this is OK, since the nano would (still) be a companion to my MDA rather than a replacement. Shuffle play on the nano is as good as on previous nanos, which is to say it is excellent. The drawbacks of the Touch aren't present on the nano, because it's more of a shrunk iPod Classic than an iPhone with no Phone.

iPod nano scores: Phone (0 out of 5), Internet Tablet (0 out of 5), native Apps (3 out of 5, games and a few 'extras'), PDA (2 out of 5), media player (5 out of 5).

So who won? Well since the iPhone doesn't have Flash, a usable headphone jack, or 3G or faster data (yet), it is a "wait for version 2.0" situation for me. As it stands right now, the first iPhone isn't quite enough for me to leave T-mobile for AT&T wireless. A 3G data, 16GB iPhone with AT&T (or Verizon) would be enough for me to leave my MDA in the drawer of obsolete tech forever.

The iPod Touch is a really nice media player, but I would have to still carry the MDA for everything else, and that's two bulky devices to carry. Maybe if they included tethering or at least the physical volume controls and the speakers. The choice (if I made it today) is upgrading to the nano 3G, and continuing to use the MDA for phone, mobile Internet, apps, and PDA. The nano is still small enough to ignore in a pocket, and with the video playback, it gets me all the new podcasts and shows I've discovered on this journey. It's also half the price of the iPhone or 16GB Touch, so it's a no-brainer. nano%20nano.jpg

The Winnah!

Mixx It Mixx It Digg It Digg It StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble Share More...

Content Recommendations from Evri
Posted by: Matt S
November 4, 2007 10:27 PM

Yes, Joel, the perfect convergence device still hasn't happened yet. But I just upgraded from the MDA to the tilt, and am pretty happy with it. It does everything pretty well, except music. There is no headphone jack, just mini USB. So it's either pair up a headset, or lug an adapter around. Lately, I just bring a Sansa Express along for music. It holds 3GB with the microSD card, and I've found that space isn't much of an issue when exchanging music is as easy as plugging in a flash drive.


Posted by: Dizzle
November 6, 2007 10:43 AM

I agree with your opinion on the iPhone. But you are a little harsh and nit-picky on the iPod touch. You are comparing the iPhone with other cellphones which is valid. However, you are also comparing the iPod touch (an MP3 player) to other cell phones, which is your basic flaw in your "reviews". No external speakers? Give me a break, it's a portable MP3 player, not a boom box. External speakers would drain the battery anyways. Besides, when I am on the go, I want to be able to hear my iPod. Not everyone around me. You also knock it's internet ability for being tied to WiFi hotspots and not being able to use 3G. It's an MP3 player (and first of it's kind to browse the net), not a cell phone. 16GB and not 160GB? It's because it uses (expensive) flash memory and not a hard drive. This was done to slim the device down and save battery life. I'll take flash memory anyday over the aging and delicate hard drive. Only problem is that flash memory IS expensive.


Posted by: Joel
November 6, 2007 12:17 PM

@Matt: I tried out the Tilt too, after my trip, and while it is a great step up from the MDA, it's still not quite enough for me to go to AT&T. (I've been dissatisfied by them before).

@Dizzie: true, the iPod touch isn't a phone, but I was trying it out to replace the functions of the nano 2G I had been carrying around, and really the lack of any physical controls nor support for the remote was the dealbreaker. I like to play my playlists in shuffle mode, and even the double-click on the home key doesn't really work if the iPod is in my pocket. Same with using it in the car: I can't change tracks without looking down, which is bad at 65 MPH. This isn't an objective review (see Tim's reviews for those), this is a subjective review pointed at specific needs that I presented in the writeup.

Thanks for reading!
-Joel
PCmag and gearlog.com


Posted by: Dean812
November 9, 2007 8:54 PM

Not to be rude, but this "review" is hardly credible. Comparing cell phones, MP3 players and new tech products like the iPod Touch is madness. Youve lost before you even begin. THEY ARE 3 DIFFERENT PRODUCTS!

What's next comparisons between a VW Beetle from 1968 and a 2007 Ferrari? Who's the editor around this website. And better yet why didnt they shred this "review" before it made it to "print". It's rubbish not because of your findings, but because when you want to compare things usually you do it with products that compare to each other in some way. This one is a stretch and not worth the time I just spent reading it.


Posted by: Mike
December 13, 2007 4:14 AM

I value the review given. I am in a similar situation choosing between a new iPod video, a classic or an iPod touch, but I'm also in the process of getting a replacement phone. The review above hasn't given me any clear answers - but I am happy to be able to read the subjective experience feedback of any user. It reflects a real situation, maybe not a "pure" comparison, but real none the less.


Posted by: Will
December 23, 2007 5:33 PM

Comparisons are the root of all evil - or so they say but I think that in the fast paced evolution of technology - we need to look at the bigger picture of hybrid tech devices vs their purebreed cousins. So the comparisons of apparently diverse products is a neccessary evil in the everchanging evolution of devices that we expect to do more with less.


Posted by: Kimmie
December 26, 2007 12:07 PM

Thanks for your review Joel. This is just the comparison I was seeking.

I'm in the middle of a drama-free contract with T-Mobile and I'm not ready to switch to At&t, and I've just bricked my iPod 5G video.

I was having a hard time deciding between the nano and touch (I carry two blackberries, one for work and one for home). My mind is made up, I don't need another bulky device. I'm on my way out to buy the nano right now. I'll be able to use it in the car, and I won't be afraid to take it to the gym. When v2.0 of the iPhone or touch comes out, maybe I'll get the new interface at that point.


Posted by: Dom
February 22, 2008 6:08 PM

I had the opportunity to get the 160G classic over the iTouch. I chose the latter. I don't need to carry around that much of my collection either, plus the iTouch is so much cooler! I already have the MDA and a the 1st. ever, 2G Nano. I'm trying to Wi-Fi to my MDA since I already have the T-Mobile internet package for $20 a month. Is this Do-able?


Posted by: sarah
May 17, 2008 9:50 PM

Hi People,

My B'day is soon and i want a music player that also play's video's. Which one should i get.

Please reply on my email: sarah.e.g@hotmail.com

Thanks


Posted by: Travel Geek
May 24, 2008 5:39 AM

i dont know what to do i went to apple today and the nano is way to small for me to watch vids and the classic round pad breaks easily so i think ill just live happily with my 8gb ipod touch :)


Posted by: Hellosz
December 26, 2008 9:46 PM

I have the ipod nano 4th generation. its really fun! :)


Posted by: Josh
February 18, 2009 1:41 AM

well l really need to know if l should get a Ipod Touch or an Nano the main reason l want is it because l want to just listen to music for about half and hour then probably play a few games then watch 2 hours of movie


Posted by: Shaniqua Jones
April 22, 2009 12:30 PM

♥To Sarah:
Personally i Think You Should Get The ipod Touch! They're Awesome! On The ipod touch you Can Get On The Internet, Get music Videos, And many more Things!


Posted by: jen*jen
May 4, 2009 7:29 AM

I have the ipod nano 4g it is awesome. i also have the itouch. and i love it. so i would reccommend the itouch before the nano it has way more srtuff on it and everybody thinks you are cool.


Posted by: nazwick
May 10, 2009 9:44 PM

Are you kidding? The Nano is so not as cool as the touch, but if you want a smaller thing that does pretty much the same but isn't a Touch do a Nano, but the touch is good for a few more apps, and it's a pretty good music player. Then again, so is the Nano. If you want to decide I would pay the little extra for the touch, and it can surf the web! It's also like a PDA!If you want to go a little farther then totally do the touch. The Nano is if you want pretty much only music, and maybe a little movie. I like the Touch more, personally.


Posted by: Nazwick
May 23, 2009 10:47 PM

Get the touch. If you have WiFi, you can surf the web. You have an address book, wallpapers, photos, it's motion sensitive. Games, T.V, YouTube! I got mine and I bring it everywhere, it's not much more in money, but so much more in the cool "Bells and Whistles" (Little uneeded features) that I have one I love, and I think if you got it, you would love it to the day you die, hopefuly not too soon. Get the touch!
iTouch! They're Way Cooler!


Posted by: Ayesha
November 13, 2009 1:54 PM

My birthday soon :)
Getting a iPod Touch because all my friends say that they like it better than a iPod nano - its too small for them.
On iPod touch they can use the internet, music, games and more
and its bigger :)


* = required
    Remember Me?
  
Please keep your comments on topic. Intelligent, thoughtful comments and questions are appreciated. Comments that contain personal attacks or profanity may be edited or removed. Comments containing personal information such as phone numbers, credit card numbers, or addresses may be edited or removed. Comments with advertisements will be removed.


 
Info Centers
Special Offers
         
 
  Ziff Davis Home | Contact Us | Advertise | Link to Us | Newsletters | RSS Feeds | Ziff Davis Media International
Digital Edition Customer Service | Subscribe to PCMag Digital Edition | Reprints
AppScout | Cranky Geeks | DigitalLife | DL.TV | ExtremeTech | GearLog | GoodCleanTech | PC Magazine | PCMagCasts | Security Watch | Smart Device Central | TechSaver
AppScout Mobile | Gearlog Mobile | GoodCleanTech Mobile | PCMag.com Mobile
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Linking Policy | Contact Us
Copyright © 1996-2009 Ziff Davis Publishing Holdings Inc. All Rights Reserved. PC Magazine, the PCMag.com logo and Gearlog are registered trademarks of Ziff Davis Publishing Holdings Inc. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis Media Inc. is prohibited.